Legislative hopefuls high on arts: survey

Candidates for the Illinois General Assembly are developing a better appreciation of the arts.

In a survey of incumbents up for re-election this year and their challengers, 83% of respondents say they would favor increasing state funding for the arts to $22.5 million annually, a hike of 64%. Two years ago, 72% said they would vote to boost the budget of the Illinois Arts Council, an agency that distributes state grants to arts groups throughout Illinois. In 1992, 54% said they supported an increase.

"Ten years ago, it seemed the focus was entirely on roads and bridges. It is heartening to see more and more elected officials recognizing the value that the arts can have on their constituents and the quality of life in this state," says Arlene Valkanas, executive director of the Illinois Arts Alliance, the arts advocacy group that conducted the survey.

The group surveys candidates in order to secure their support for arts funding upfront, a commitment the group can then try to hold them to after the election.

Several respondents were qualified in their support, however. Rep. Andrea Moore, R-Libertyville, wrote in her response that any increase "needs to be viewed in relation to the total budget." And Rep. Maggie Crotty, D-Oak Forest, while backing increased funding, added, "But (I) would have to look at the legislation."

As the alliance begins its quest for a funding increase, Ms. Valkanas points out that support shown in previous surveys did translate into more dollars. Arts Council funding increased by $1.3 million in 1998, and by another $750,000 last year.

An Arts Alliance poll of congressional candidates found less backing for funding increases at the federal level. When asked if they support increasing National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) funding from $98 million to the $150-million level called for by President Clinton, about 57% of respondents said yes. That response is up about two percentage points from 1998.

Ms. Valkanas sees the lower overall support at the federal level as a reflection of the far more partisan nature of the NEA funding debate.